National Institute of Informatics - Digital Silk Road Project
Digital Archive of Toyo Bunko Rare Books

> > > >
Color New!IIIF Color HighRes Gray HighRes PDF   Japanese English
0318 Tibet and Turkestan : vol.1
Tibet and Turkestan : vol.1 / Page 318 (Grayscale High Resolution Image)

New!Citation Information

doi: 10.20676/00000231
Citation Format: Chicago | APA | Harvard | IEEE

OCR Text

well as European, has caused some thoughtless
writers to question the good faith or acumen of
Father Huc and earlier travellers who attest the
friendliness of the Tibetans as contrasted with the
rigidity of their Chinese advisers. The explanation
is not far to seek. China, being more exposed, first
felt the shock of European aggression. Since the
time of Father Huc, the Tibetans have learned from
happenings on their western and southern frontier
something of the danger to native states which arises
from the smallest opening left to the coming-in
either of the European or of his subject native
races. Bhutan, Sikkim, and Nepal, rough mountain
states on Tibet's northern border, have been forced
to admit British residents at their capitals. How
far-extended might be the influence thus gained no
one, except the principals, could at any time know.
That their neighbours would have preferred com-
plete independence was, of course, a fair presump-
tion for the Tibetans. But whether the ruler of
either, at any particular time, was or was not,
through bribery or fear, ready to lend his power to
the ever-growing British-Indian Empire, could only
be surmised.
The Goorkhas, masters in Nepal, were not related
to the Tibetans by blood or religion, and were thus
the more readily suspected. When, in 1854, Tibet
was again attacked by the Goorkha-Nepalese, who
hoped for better luck than had been met in 1792,
the Chinese and the Tibetans might well suppose
that their neighbours were receiving aid and comfort
from the "protecting" power, which particularly
watches over the foreign relations of its charges.